Literature DB >> 20610282

New concepts of biobanks--strategic chance for uro-oncology.

Peter J Goebell1, Manuel M Morente.   

Abstract

Cancer, as well as other common diseases, is a complex condition that not only causes a major threat to human health, but also represents a huge burden to society in terms of healthcare cost and loss of economic productivity. Treatment improvements remain elusive, since the causes of cancer are due to a huge number of small and possibly additive effects arising from genetic susceptibility, lifestyle, and environmental conditions. Thus, progress in translational cancer research investigating these changes and their complex interaction is highly dependent on large series of cases (affected and unaffected individuals) including high quality samples and their associated data. Therefore, large and well-organized biobanks have been established, are underway, or are planned in many countries and institutions. The integration of these resources with powerful molecular and "omics" approaches, integrated bioinformatic tools hold the promise to further advance our knowledge of disease development, thus leading to better prevention and treatment strategies. However, these valuable and irreplaceable collections typically suffer from underutilization, due to fragmentation of the collections and their accessibility, lack of common management strategies, including consensus on standard operating procedures, unique policies of utilization, and distribution as well as missing input on a broad basis reflecting research needs on an interdisciplinary, multi-institutional fashion beyond project-driven interest. The uro-oncologic community has not yet contributed to these efforts to its full potential, and broad knowledge on the contemporary developments in the field of biobanking and input into these efforts are still missing. This review presents an overview on biobanking and may serve as an update to be integrated into future discussions on managing biobanks involving uro-oncology. It is based on the discussions at the last meeting of the International Bladder Cancer Network in Barcelona (Spain) in fall 2008 and has been also largely influenced by the works and discussions of the Marble Arch International Working Group on Biobanking for Biomedical Research. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20610282     DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2010.03.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urol Oncol        ISSN: 1078-1439            Impact factor:   3.498


  4 in total

1.  Linkage of data from diverse data sources (LDS): a data combination model provides clinical data of corresponding specimens in biobanking information system.

Authors:  Okyaz Eminaga; Enver Özgür; Axel Semjonow; Jan Herden; Ilgar Akbarov; Ali Tok; Udo Engelmann; Sebastian Wille
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2013-09-11       Impact factor: 4.460

2.  A primer on a hepatocellular carcinoma bioresource bank using the cancer genome atlas guidelines: practical issues and pitfalls.

Authors:  N Thao T Nguyen; Ron T Cotton; Theresa R Harring; Jacfranz J Guiteau; Marie-Claude Gingras; David A Wheeler; Christine A O'Mahony; Richard A Gibbs; F Charles Brunicardi; John A Goss
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 3.  [Structure of biobanks for urological research].

Authors:  G Hatiboglu; J Huber; E Herpel; I V Popeneciu; J Nyarangi-Dix; D Teber; B A Hadaschik; S Pahernik; S Duensing; M Hohenfellner
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 4.  Aspects of Modern Biobank Activity - Comprehensive Review.

Authors:  Wiktor Paskal; Adriana M Paskal; Tomasz Dębski; Maciej Gryziak; Janusz Jaworowski
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2018-05-05       Impact factor: 3.201

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.